Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act

Rothschild Bank AG Signs Non-Prosecution Agreement

/0 Comments/in , /by

On June 3, 2015, the US Department of Justice (“DOJ”) announced that Rothschild Bank AG (Rothschild bank) have reached resolution under the department’s Swiss Bank Program.

Rothschild Bank Facts

Rothschild Bank was founded in 1968 and is headquartered in Zurich, Switzerland. Rothschild Bank offered services that it knew could and did assist U.S. taxpayers in concealing assets and income from the Internal Revenue Service (IRS), including code-named accounts, numbered accounts and hold mail service, where Rothschild Bank would hold all mail correspondence for a particular client at the bank. These services allowed certain U.S. taxpayers to minimize the paper trail associated with the undeclared assets and income they held at Rothschild Bank in Switzerland.

For a number of years, including after Swiss bank UBS AG announced in 2008 that it was under criminal investigation, and following instructions from certain U.S. taxpayers, Rothschild Bank serviced certain U.S. customers without disclosing their identities to the IRS. Some of Rothschild Bank’s U.S. clients had accounts that were nominally structured in the names of non-U.S. entities. In some such cases, Rothschild Bank knew that a U.S. client was the true beneficial owner of the account but nonetheless obtained a form or document that falsely declared that the beneficial owner was not a U.S. taxpayer.

Since August 1, 2008, Rothschild Bank had 66 U.S.-related accounts held by entities created in Panama, Liechtenstein, the British Virgin Islands, the Cayman Islands or other foreign countries with U.S. beneficial owners. At least 21 of these accounts had false IRS Forms W-8BEN in the file, which are used to identify the beneficial owner of an account. Rothschild Bank knew it was highly probable that such U.S. clients were engaging in this scheme to avoid U.S. taxes but permitted these accounts to trade in U.S. securities without reporting account earnings or transmitting any withholding taxes to the IRS, as Rothschild Bank was required to do.

Rothschild Bank also opened accounts for U.S. taxpayers who had left other Swiss banks that the Department of Justice was investigating, including UBS. Since August 1, 2008, Rothschild Bank had 332 U.S.-related accounts with an aggregate maximum balance of approximately $1.5 billion. Of these 332 accounts, 191 accounts had U.S. beneficial owners and an aggregate maximum balance of approximately $836 million.

Rothschild Bank Penalties and Disclosures

In accordance with the terms of the Swiss Bank Program, the Rothschild bank mitigated its penalty by encouraging U.S. accountholders to come into compliance with their U.S. tax and disclosure obligations. Nevertheless, Rothschild Bank will pay a penalty of $11.51 million.

Rothschild Bank also made numerous disclosures of various information regarding US-held accounts.

Consequences of Rothschild Bank Non-Prosecution Agreement for US Taxpayers

The most immediate impact of Rothschild Bank Non-Prosecution Agreement will be felt by US accountholders who wish to enter OVDP after June 3, 2015 – their penalty rate will go up from 27.5 percent of the highest value of their foreign accounts and other assets included in the OVDP penalty base to a whopping 50 percent penalty rate.

Furthermore, the US taxpayers with undisclosed accounts which were related in any way to Rothschild Bank face an increased risk of IRS detection due to transfer information turned over to the DOJ by Rothschild Bank. “The days of safely hiding behind shell corporations and numbered bank accounts are over,” said Acting Assistant Attorney General Caroline D. Ciraolo of the Department of Justice’s Tax Division. “As each additional bank signs up under the Swiss Bank Program, more and more information is flowing to the IRS agents and Justice Department prosecutors going after illegally concealed offshore accounts and the financial professionals who help U.S. taxpayers hide assets abroad.”

Finally, the rest of the US taxpayers with undisclosed accounts must contemplate a potential future that their accounts maybe subject to IRS discovery if the Program for Swiss Banks is extended to other countries. This possibility is increasingly real when one takes into account the impact FATCA has had on the global international tax reporting landscape.

What Should US Taxpayers with Undisclosed Foreign Accounts Do?

If you have undisclosed foreign account and other foreign assets, you should immediately commence the review of your voluntary disclosure options. Since the introduction of the Streamlined Procedures, the IRS has opened up a world of reduced penalties to various non-willful taxpayers. Willful taxpayers should realize that, the longer they wait, the worse their tax position may become.

In order to do your voluntary disclosure properly, please consult Mr. Eugene Sherayzen, an experienced international tax lawyer of Sherayzen Law Office. We have helped hundreds of US taxpayers worldwide and we can help you.

Contact Us to Schedule Your Confidential Consultation Now!

Four Swiss Banks Sign Non-Prosecution Agreements

/0 Comments/in , /by

On May 28, 2015, four Swiss Banks – Société Générale Private Banking (Lugano-Svizzera), MediBank AG, LBBW (Schweiz) AG and Scobag Privatbank AG – signed Non-Prosecution Agreements under the Department of Justice Swiss Bank Program. These four Swiss banks now increased the list of the Swiss Banks that reached the resolution under the Program to the total of seven as of May 31, 2015.

Four Swiss Banks and Swiss Bank Program

The Swiss Bank Program was announced on August 29, 2013. It offered a path to Swiss banks to resolve all of their potential criminal liabilities in the United States in exchange for voluntarily turning over information regarding certain activities and detailed information regarding US-help financial accounts. Category 2 banks were also supposed to pay certain penalty under the rules specified by the Program.

All of the four Swiss Banks entered the Program and signed the Non-Prosecution Agreements on May 28. Under the program, the banks made a complete disclose of their cross-border activities, provided detailed account-by-account information for US-held accounts (direct and indirect interest), promised to cooperated with any treaty requests regarding account information, provided detailed information as to other banks that transferred funds into secret accounts or that accepted funds when secret accounts were closed, agreed to close accounts of accountholders who fail to come into compliance with U.S. reporting obligations, and paid appropriate penalties.

Compliance History of the Four Swiss Banks

The DOJ gave a fairly detailed history of all four Swiss Banks.

The largest of the four Swiss Banks – Société Générale Private Banking (Lugano-Svizzera) SA (SGPB-Lugano) – was established in 1974 and is headquartered in Lugano, Switzerland. Through referrals and pre-existing relationships, SGPB-Lugano accepted, opened and maintained accounts for U.S. taxpayers, and knew that it was likely that certain U.S. taxpayers who maintained accounts there were not complying with their U.S. reporting obligations. Since Aug. 1, 2008, SGPB-Lugano held and managed approximately 109 U.S.-related accounts, with a peak of assets under management of approximately $139.6 million, and offered a variety of services that it knew assisted U.S. clients in the concealment of assets and income from the Internal Revenue Service (IRS), including “hold mail” services and numbered accounts. Some U.S. taxpayers expressly instructed SGPB-Lugano not to disclose their names to the IRS, to sell their U.S. securities and to not invest in U.S. securities, which would have required disclosure and withholding. In addition, certain relationship managers actively assisted or otherwise facilitated U.S. taxpayers in establishing and maintaining undeclared accounts in a manner designed to conceal the true ownership or beneficial interest in the accounts, including concealing undeclared accounts by opening and maintaining accounts in the name of non-U.S. entities, including sham entities, having an officer of SGPB-Lugano act as an officer of the sham entities, processing cash withdrawals from accounts being closed and then maintaining the funds in a safe deposit box at the bank and making “transitory” accounts available, thereby allowing multiple accountholders to transfer funds in such a way as to shield the identity and account number of the accountholder. SGPB-Lugano will pay a penalty of $1.363 million.

Created in 1979 and headquartered in Zug, Switzerland, MediBank AG (MediBank) provided private banking services to U.S. taxpayers and assisted in the evasion of U.S. tax obligations by opening and maintaining undeclared accounts. In furtherance of a scheme to help U.S. taxpayers hide assets from the IRS and evade taxes, MediBank failed to comply with its withholding and reporting obligations, providing “hold mail” services and offering numbered accounts, thus reducing the ability of U.S. authorities to learn the identity of the taxpayers. After it became public that the Department of Justice was investigating UBS, MediBank hired a relationship manager from UBS and permitted some of that person’s U.S. clients to open accounts at MediBank. Since Aug. 1, 2008, MediBank had 14 U.S. related accounts with assets under management of $8,620,675. MediBank opened, serviced and profited from accounts for U.S. clients with the knowledge that many likely were not complying with their U.S. tax obligations. MediBank will pay a penalty of $826,000.

Of the four Swiss banks, it appears that LBBW (Schweiz) AG (LBBW-Schweiz) had the largest average balances per US-help account. Since August 2008, LBBW-Schweiz held 35 U.S. related accounts with $128,664,130 in assets under management. After it became public that the department was investigating UBS, LBBW-Schweiz opened accounts from former clients at UBS and Credit Suisse. Despite its knowledge that U.S. taxpayers had a legal duty to report and pay tax on income earned on their accounts, LLBW-Schweiz permitted undeclared accounts to be opened and maintained, and offered a variety of services that would and did assist U.S. clients in the concealment of assets and income from the IRS. These services included following U.S. accountholders instructions not to invest in U.S. securities and not reporting the accounts to the IRS and agreeing to hold statements and other mail, causing documents regarding the accounts to remain outside the United States. LBBW-Schweiz will pay a penalty of $34,000.

Headquartered in Basel, Switzerland, Scobag Privatbank AG (Scobag) was founded in 1968 to provide financial and other services to its founders, and obtained its banking license in 1986. Since August 2008, Scobag had 13 U.S. related accounts, the maximum dollar value of which was $6,945,700. Scobag offered a variety of services that it knew could and did assist U.S. clients in the concealment of assets and income from the IRS, including “hold mail” services and numbered accounts. Scobag will pay a penalty of $9,090.

It is interesting to note that, out of the four Swiss Banks, LBBW-Schweiz and Scobag paid the least penalties. Undoubtedly, the reason lies in the mitigation of penalties due to accounts disclosed by US person as part of their OVDP compliance.

Non-Prosecution Agreements and Four Swiss Banks

According to the terms of the non-prosecution agreements signed today, each of the Four Swiss Banks agreed to cooperate in any related criminal or civil proceedings, demonstrate its implementation of controls to stop misconduct involving undeclared U.S. accounts and pay the penalties in return for the department’s agreement not to prosecute these banks for tax-related criminal offenses.

“[These Non-Prosecution] agreements reflect the Tax Division’s continued progress towards reaching appropriate resolutions with the banks that self-reported and voluntarily entered the Swiss Bank Program,” said Acting Assistant Attorney General Caroline D. Ciraolo of the Department of Justice’s Tax Division. “The department is currently investigating accountholders, bank employees, and other facilitators and institutions based on information supplied by various sources, including the banks participating in this Program. Our message is clear – there is no safe haven.”

Contact Sherayzen Law Office for Professional Help With Your Voluntary Disclosure

As Swiss Banks (in addition to the four Swiss Banks mentioned in this article) sign Non-Prosecution Agreements and turn over information to the DOJ, the US taxpayers with undisclosed accounts in Switzerland, Cayman Islands, Israel, Lebanon, Panama, Singapore and other related foreign jurisdictions are operating under the increased risk of the IRS detection. Moreover, the on-going FATCA compliance introduces a similarly insupportable risk to US taxpayers worldwide.

The IRS discovery of your undisclosed foreign accounts may result in potentially catastrophic consequences, including criminal penalties and incarceration.

This is why, if you have undisclosed foreign financial accounts and any other foreign assets, contact Sherayzen Law Office professional help. Our experienced legal team will thoroughly analyze your case, determine your existing penalty exposure, analyze your voluntary disclosure options and implement the entire voluntary disclosure plan (including preparation of tax forms and legal documents).

Contact Us Today to Schedule Your Confidential Consultation!

Minneapolis MN FATCA Tax Lawyer Update: FATCA-Related Forms

/0 Comments/in , /by

As a Minneapolis MN FATCA Tax Lawyer, I often receive questions about what US tax forms precisely are affected by the implementation of the Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act (FATCA). Here is a list of the tax forms most affected by FATCA:

1. Minneapolis MN FATCA Tax Lawyer: IRS Form 1042 and 1042-S

Form 1042 is used as an annual withholding tax return for US-source income of non-US persons. Form 1042-S is used to report income that is considered to be “Amounts Subject to Reporting on Form 1042-S” (basically US-source income paid to foreign persons such as FDAP (fixed or determinable annual or periodical) income; certain gains from the disposal of timber, coal or domestic iron; and gains related to contingent payments received from the sale or exchange of intangible property (such as intellectual property rights), amounts withheld under Chapters 3 and 4 of the Internal Revenue Code, distributions of effectively connected income by a publicly traded partnership (or nominee), and certain federal procurement payments paid to foreign persons who are subject to withholding under Section 5000C.

2. Minneapolis MN FATCA Tax Lawyer: IRS Form 8966

For a Minneapolis MN FATCA Tax Lawyer, IRS Form 8966 is highly important. The main reason is because Form 8966 is an actual FATCA Report that needs to be filed by foreign financial institutions (FFIs) and their variations (PFFI, Us Branch of a PFFI treated as non-US person, RDC FFI, Limited Branch or Limited FFI, and Reporting Model 2 FFI), QI (qualified intermediary), WP (withholding foreign partnership), WT (withholding foreign trust) , direct reporting NFFE, and a Sponsoring Entity.

The purpose of this form is to allow these filers to report the required FATCA information with respect to mainly foreign accounts held (directly or indirectly) by US persons.

3. Minneapolis MN FATCA Tax Lawyer: IRS Forms W-8 Series

The full list of these forms include: Form W-8BEN, Form W-8BEN-E, W-8ECI, Form W-8EXP, and W-8IMY. The full discussion of these forms is beyond the scope of this article; suffice it to state that all of these forms play a critical part in FATCA and tax withholding compliance of various FFIs and NFFEs.

4. Minneapolis MN FATCA Tax Lawyer: IRS Form 8938

As a Minneapolis MN FATCA Tax Lawyer, I believe that IRS Form 8938 is one of the most important developments that came out of FATCA. Unlike the other forms listed in this article, this form needs to be prepared directly by the US taxpayers and filed with their US tax returns. The importance of this form cannot be overstated, because Form 8938 is a “catch-all” form which steps-in with its own reporting requirements when other international tax forms are not required. It also incorporates by reference some of the most important international tax compliance requirements even when other international tax forms contain detailed information.

Minneapolis MN FATCA Tax Lawyer: Other Forms

The four categories of forms above describe the US tax forms that have been impacted by FATCA in a direct and profound way. There are other forms that have been affected by implementation of FATCA, but this impact is a rather indirect one (by reference or implication).

Cayman Islands FATCA Registration Portal

/0 Comments/in , /by

On March 20, 2015, the Cayman Islands FATCA Registration Portal was launched by the Department for International Tax Cooperation (which is a department within Cayman Islands Tax Information Authority).

Cayman Islands FATCA Background 

The Cayman Islands FATCA Registration Portal is part of the long process of Cayman Islands FATCA compliance. Cayman Islands FATCA IGA (Model 1) was signed with the United States on November 29, 2013. At the same time, Cayman Islands signed the amended Tax Information Exchange Agreement. Both of these developments led to the creation of the Portal as a way to automatically exchange information required by FATCA between Cayman Islands and the United States.

It is also important to point out that Cayman Islands FATCA compliance was not only driven by the US considerations, but also by the UK considerations. As an overseas territory of the United Kingdom, Cayman Islands had to come to an agreement with the United States that could not have been better the terms negotiated between the UK and Cayman Islands with respect to the exchanges of tax-related information.

Purchase of the Portal

The Portal plays a critical role in Cayman Islands FATCA compliance, because it allows Cayman’s financial institutions (including the investment funds based in Cayman islands) to report information required by FATCA to the Cayman Islands Tax Information Authority, which, as it is mandated by Model 1 FATCA agreement, will turn over the required information to the IRS.

Registration

As part of Cayman Islands FATCA compliance, the Cayman Islands Tax Information Authority warned the island’s financial institutions that they much must register via the Portal by April 30, 2015 and provide their names, FATCA classification, principal point of contact and other information.

Reporting Deadline by May 31, 2015

The deadline for reporting the 2014 (calendar year) information by the Cayman’s financial institutions must be done by May 31, 2015. The information that will have to be submitted through the Portal is the one usually required by FATCA, including:

1. US person’s name, address and tax identification number (and date of birth, where applicable);
2. US person’s account number or its equivalent;
3. Name and ID of the reporting financial institution; and
4. Year-End Balance of the account.

Interestingly enough, the UK FATCA requirement for Cayman Islands is much later – May 31, 2016.

Caymans Islands FATCA Compliance Is Not Unique

Cayman Islands FATCA compliance through a Portal is now a common theme throughout the world. In fact, it is expected that most of the Model 1 FATCA countries around the world have either complied with 2014 US FATCA requirements or will do so soon, and they are likely to be using a Portal of some kind.

For example, it is expected that the following jurisdictions will do their FATCA reporting through an information reporting system (deadlines in parenthesis): Ireland (June 30, 2015), Luxembourg (June 30, 2015), United Kingdom (May 31, 2015), Canada (May 2, 2015), and so on.

What Portal Means for US Persons with Undisclosed Cayman Islands Accounts

If you are a US person with undisclosed foreign accounts in Cayman Islands (any many other jurisdictions around the world), you are very likely to have very little time left before your account will be disclosed to the IRS. The penalties (especially FBAR and Form 8938 penalties) for failure to report foreign accounts can be draconian, including potential incarceration. Moreover, once the IRS learns about the existence of your account and initiates an invest, you may not be able to do a voluntary disclosure to reduce your penalties.

This means that US persons with undisclosed foreign accounts need to immediately contact an experienced international tax lawyer to explore their voluntary disclosure options in order to timely file their request for Preclearance.

Contact Sherayzen Law Office for Professional Help With Disclosing Your Foreign Accounts

Sherayzen Law Office, Ltd. is the experienced international tax firm that can help you with the voluntary disclosure of your foreign accounts. We have already successfully helped hundreds of US taxpayers around the world to conduct various types of voluntary disclosures (SDOP (Streamlined Domestic Offshore Procedures), SFOP (Streamlined Foreign Offshore Procedures), Delinquent Information Returns, Delinquent FBAR Submission, and Noisy/Reasonable Cause disclosures), and We can help You!

Contact Us to Schedule Your Confidential Consultation!

read »

-- Delivered by Feed43 service

'>
3 IRS Strikes? FATCA, FBARs, An ‘Abode’ In U.S. Although You Live Abroad/in , , /by

Americans abroad usually assume their first $100K of earnings are tax-free. It’s not that simple, and several years of earnings may be at stake when you find out, making FATCA and FBAR problems even worse. read »

— Delivered by Feed43 service